Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today we highlight:
- an article arguing how President Trump’s challengers “might be about to make” a mistake “by choosing a partisan liberal lawyer, rather than a conservative, to deliver oral arguments on Nov. 5”;
- an article reporting how “[t]hirty-one former federal judges urged the U.S. Supreme Court to reject President Donald Trump’s attempts to use emergency powers to impose sweeping, world-wide tariffs”;
- an article discussing how the manner in which “AI inventions are treated at the USPTO is one of many changes taking place under the [Trump] administration”; and
- an article highlighting some “noteworthy trends for practitioners and stakeholders alike to consider” given the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s updated guidance related to inter partes review and post-grant review proceedings.
Jason Willick authored an article for the Washington Post arguing how President Trump’s challengers “might be about to make” a mistake “by choosing a partisan liberal lawyer, rather than a conservative, to deliver oral arguments on Nov. 5.” Willick wrote that, in his view, “[t]his case can be won only by convincing at least two of six Republican-appointed justices that Trump has exceeded his lawful powers.” Willick also observes that, in his opinion, a conservative advocate “speaks the conservative and originalist language of the [C]ourt’s majority more fluently” than a liberal advocate—and added that “[t]hat matters.” For more information on the case, check out the case page in Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, Inc.
Jordan Fischer authored an article for Bloomberg Law reporting how “[t]hirty-one former federal judges urged the U.S. Supreme Court to reject President Donald Trump’s attempts to use emergency powers to impose sweeping, world-wide tariffs.” Fischer suggests that, “[w]hile it’s not uncommon for former judges to submit amicus briefs in federal cases . . . [this] filing was unusual both for the number of judges willing to sign on and the high-profile policy dispute at the center of the case.” Again, for more information on this case, check out the relevant case page.
Madeleine Key authored an article for Inc. discussing how the manner in which “AI inventions are treated at the USPTO is one of many changes taking place under the [Trump] administration.” Key points out some of the steps taken by John Squires, the new USPTO Director, and notes how “these early and unconventional moves show a USPTO eager to partner with innovators rather than deny them.” Key goes on to suggest how, “[f]or entrepreneurs innovating with AI, this could be the first moment in years when patent protection works as a dependable strategic business tool—a way to attract investment, form partnerships, and compete globally.”
Andrew Ramos wrote an article for Law360 highlighting some “noteworthy trends for practitioners and stakeholders alike to consider” given the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s updated guidance related to inter partes review and post-grant review proceedings. In the article, Ramos observes “two clear takeaways: (1) the America Invents Act proceedings, IPRs and PGRs, have been and will continue to be discretionarily denied at a significantly higher rate; and (2) navigating these changes will be critical for success in patent litigation.” Furthermore, Ramos emphasizes, as the “landscape continues to change, it will be critical to monitor the developments at the USPTO, and ensure the best decisions and strategies for stakeholders and practitioners alike.”